OK good to know that there was no fraud committed. However once again McQuaid has shot his mouth off once again in the wrong direction. Surely the head of the governing body would like to see the truth come out. OK I know he doesn't but for the good of the sport he should. I certainly hope WADA and/or the USADA can do something with the evidence gathered if they can get their hands on it.

I am sure LA,s legal team will be trying to stop that sharing from happening.

Way to premature for McQuaid to make the comments he did but did that surprise anyone?

I think I will be sick to my stomach if Contador gets busted tomorrow because some obscure lab found a teensy-micro-nano trace amount of Clenbuterol -- after all we've heard from Floyd & Tyler about what LA did, LA who is now getting off scot-free.

I've seen various opinions as to whether the Feds can share that info. One writer says the info is sealed, another says USADA may have been part of the investigation from the get go and is therefore privy to it. We'll see.

I guess if that line worked for Bruyneel, it'll work for Liggett too. So Lance has stared death in the face & swears he didn't dope, and Ricco swore on his grandmother's grave that he didn't dope. These cyclists are a solemnly swearing bunch.

I don't necessarily think Lance is off scot-free. He isn't going to jail. That is all we know. Whether the USADA and WADA can get their hands on the evidence is now the issue. It isn't all over yet.

Go back to sleep Ali.

Thanks,

Buddy

Calling all dim-wits ... Just a guess, but maybe all the evidence on doping test results came from USADA and WADA ? Lance sailed through their test before, so what, precisely, do you think has changed ?

It's all over. Whether Lance doped or not ... the history books will say he didn't and that he won 7 TdF's in a row. I guess you'll just have to come to terms with that.

Seriously Ali .......... name calling. Would I expect better from you? Unfortunately no.

The evidence Ali relates to testimony by others that Armstrong doped. If the evidence can be corroberated then it can be used to sanction. We know that Hamilton and Landis testified that Armstrong doped plus there are stories of others. This along with possible drug purchases could have been uncovered. All this "evidence" can be used to sanction Armstrong. And I think it would be safe to say that Armstrong's legal team will be doing their best to ensure that the information is not shared.

Do you think they didn't get anything in their two years of investigation? From reports on cycling news the decision not to presecute has come down to one person and the federal investigators aren't at all happy about it.

So Ali you can bask in the glow that Armstrong's victories gave you. Go for it. The history books said that Contador won the 2010 TdF and the 2011 Giro too. Oops ...those history books are going to be amended.

Interesting take in CN that should keep the conspiracies spinning on some lesser forums:

"I talked to someone within the investigation but the reason why the case was shut down was due to a one-man decision. The evidence against those involved was absolutely overwhelming. They were going to be charged with a slew of crimes but for reasons unexplained he closed the case saying it wasn't open for discussion," the source said.

Seriously Ali .......... name calling. Would I expect better from you? Unfortunately no.

The evidence Ali relates to testimony by others that Armstrong doped. If the evidence can be corroberated then it can be used to sanction. We know that Hamilton and Landis testified that Armstrong doped plus there are stories of others. This along with possible drug purchases could have been uncovered. All this "evidence" can be used to sanction Armstrong. And I think it would be safe to say that Armstrong's legal team will be doing their best to ensure that the information is not shared.

Do you think they didn't get anything in their two years of investigation? From reports on cycling news the decision not to presecute has come down to one person and the federal investigators aren't at all happy about it.

So Ali you can bask in the glow that Armstrong's victories gave you. Go for it. The history books said that Contador won the 2010 TdF and the 2011 Giro too. Oops ...those history books are going to be amended.

Thanks,

Buddy

Read Rake's post. Lance was never going to lose this case. I always maintained that. Lance is friends with the rich and the influencial. That's all you need to know.

Read Rake's post. Lance was never going to lose this case. I always maintained that. Lance is friends with the rich and the influencial. That's all you need to know.

Good night.

Ali

Ali

That doesn't make it right, and also blurs your views. Did you ascertain he would always get off because of the above, but you thought he was guilty? Or because you thought he was innocent and having stared death in the face would never do the drug thing?

My best guess is that Ali perhaps thinks the sun doesn't shine until Lance bends over.

Thanks,

Buddy

I have to differ with Phil - this is not a good day for cycling. Lance wasn't found innocent... then again innocence is often hard or impossible to prove. What we are left with now are several confliting testimonies of what happened... so the situation now more than ever is un resolved. Unresolved questions never go away... will Hamilton, Landis and others now be charged with perjury? Will Lance sue them for slander? This is the worst possible scenario as the question will linger far into the future unless WADA and USADA pursue it to a final conclusion. Unfortunately, we are left with something much worse than before the investigation was opened by the feds. I suppose we will be left to rationalize why the fed dropped the investigation, we assume because they couldn't prove fraud of the government? Will USADA and WADA get the testimony and info from the grand jury and will they pursue it as they would any other rider in the past?

I'm beginning to think LA needs a nickname change from The Boss to the Teflon Don. Seriously, I'm in awe at how much was thrown at him over the years and how little has managed to really stick. It's not like anyone who follows cycling believes he could have really been clean during at least parts of his career, but if you look at who else in the top 10 he's survived from those 7 Tour wins...pretty impressive. Ullrich, Heras, Botero, Mancebo, Vino, Sevilla, Hamilton, Rumsas, Landis, Basso, Mayo, Rasmussen. A veritable who's who of doping.

War. War never changes. The end of the world occurred pretty much as we had predicted: Too many humans, not enough space or resources to go around. The details are trivial and pointless, the reasons, as always, purely human ones.

I'm beginning to think LA needs a nickname change from The Boss to the Teflon Don. Seriously, I'm in awe at how much was thrown at him over the years and how little has managed to really stick. It's not like anyone who follows cycling believes he could have really been clean during at least parts of his career, but if you look at who else in the top 10 he's survived from those 7 Tour wins...pretty impressive. Ullrich, Heras, Botero, Mancebo, Vino, Sevilla, Hamilton, Rumsas, Landis, Basso, Mayo, Rasmussen. A veritable who's who of doping.

Good point, he is a survivor in many ways. As for me, I would not yet coat him with that title.

Let's see what the govt is willing to turn over, and whether the 7-year limit applies to the next round of investigations by WADA, and in the US.

There is a big issue that could be very worrisome for him. Remember how hard he fought against those leaks? The govt had to be careful with this issue, which apparently came up for discussion druing the district attorney's explanation as to why the case was not tried.

Well, if most of those files are turned over to WADA and the US anti doping agency, you can expect most or all of the material to hit the presses in a short time, history says. I don't think you will see, however, the grand jury testimonies come to light.

If the contents are close to what is being intimated, it will make the Festina affair look like a playground misdemeanor. The size, depth, scope, and number of people involved over a period of time could be discouragenly impressive.

This for a sport that just took a beating with the AC affair, and which will be brought again to light in a few months during his absence at the Tour, where every accomplishment by the main protagonists will be sided against what AC might have done against them.

A sport unparalleled in its asidiousness in policing itself re doping.

If the 7-year limitation blocks another bullet for him, the likely leaks to the press will mean that his day in court will take place in the chambers of the court of public opinion.

With no possibility of criminal charges, and unless WADA and the US anti-doping agency can find a way around the 7-year limitation issue, it may be indeed be in the public court that we see trial.

If he survives that, I give you that here is a guy that you can fry eggs and cheese on that won't stick.

Really though, will LA even care about any possible convictions apart from a criminal one? He's probably gonna keep his Tour wins, he's more than rich enough to pay off civil cases if he has to, and his reputation is unlikely to be besmirched much by a possible ban anymore.

War. War never changes. The end of the world occurred pretty much as we had predicted: Too many humans, not enough space or resources to go around. The details are trivial and pointless, the reasons, as always, purely human ones.

... It's not like anyone who follows cycling believes he could have really been clean during at least parts of his career, but if you look at who else in the top 10 he's survived from those 7 Tour wins...pretty impressive ...

I'm just reading David Millar's book. Quite interesting with regard to doping in the sport, if you choose to believe him. I'm not going to say anything else, but it does put the performance benefits of doping into context. Interesting.

Really though, will LA even care about any possible convictions apart from a criminal one? He's probably gonna keep his Tour wins, he's more than rich enough to pay off civil cases if he has to, and his reputation is unlikely to be besmirched much by a possible ban anymore.

You know, I think so. He dodged criminal issues bullets, by far the biggest concern.

But Lance likes to win. He is a very visible person by choice, and his popularity, as well as his legacy, depends in large part on the good will that people have for him as a cancer survivor who thrived against great odds, and for what he has done via Livestrong and other activities, in the name of clean living.

If the crap hit the proverbial journalistic fan, and facts show otherwise, fans everywhere would start to see Livestrong for what it may have been really about: Chemstrong.

Look at how big Livestrong has become. Make no mistake about it we do not live in a democratic society, we live in a Capitalistic society where money influences decision considerably more the the PEOPLE do. I will not debate the right of wrong of that.

Any politician that looks at the money this organization raises in support of a cause largely because of the iconic figure that started it, and the harm that would be done to it's capacity to continue that good work if he was crestfallen would choose to make sure that did not happen. A couple of million people (if that many) would like to see LA nailed because of the injustice he brought to his sport. A couple hundred million are effected by the cause he represents. Read the site a bit, look at the names of political leaders listed on it (and no you cannot use their name without their support) and yes you pay for that support. Look at the global reach of the organization.

I found it very hard to believe from the beginning that at some point this investigation would be squashed by people in high places. There was no way to prove him innocent, and a marginal chance to prove him guilty. The sport was already devastated by doping scandal so nailing him would not improve this or any other sport, but the cost of taking him down would be much much larger. I don't want to imply that he bought his way out of this, I don't think that happened. I do believe his activity outside of the sport bought him some good will and the decision was made to stop pursing him. is it fair? no, do I understand? I think i do.

The problem here is that Armstrong is a national hero in the States. Present company excepted, US Joe public views Armstrong as the very pinnacle of success, sportsmanship and philanthropic deeds. If he was exposed as a fraud and a doper, then in all likliehood, public morale in the US, already stretched to the limit by the drastic state of the economy, would finally break. I have no opinion on the matter, personally, but I'm sure the top politicians in the US do and we all know where the buck stops when it all hits the fan. Letting Armstrong walk would be a no-brainer for Obama.